Opioid receptor antagonism and neural response to monetary rewards: Pilot studies in light and heavy alcohol users
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is a prevalent condition associated with high degree of comorbidity and mortality. Among the few approved pharmacotherapies for AUD, two involve opioid receptor antagonism. Naltrexone and nalmefene are thought to act via opioid receptor blockage to reduce neural response to alcohol and drug-associated cues and consumption, but there have been limited efforts to characterize these effects in humans. In these studies, we sought to test the magnitude of opioid antagonism effects on neural response to monetary rewards in two groups: light drinkers (for the naltrexone study) and heavy drinkers (for the nalmefene study). We conducted double-blind, randomized, crossover pilot studies of reward activation in the brain following acute administration of opioid antagonist and placebo in 11 light and 9 heavy alcohol users. We used a monetary incentive delay task during functional MRI. We found a main effect of cue type on BOLD activation in the nucleus accumbens, demonstrating a neural reward response. The effect of opioid antagonism, relative to placebo, was small and nonsignificant for reward activation in the accumbens for both light and heavy alcohol users. Based on the results of two pilot studies, opioid antagonist medications do not appear to decrease neural activation to monetary rewards in the nucleus accumbens relative to placebo.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".